Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Sony deletes more movies from the accounts of people who ‘bought’ them

techdirt.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 472 posts

Re: Sony deletes more movies from the accounts of people who ‘bought’ them

#161

Post by kazinator »

pdpi wrote: post #119
vman81 wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They'll argue you're "buying" a license that they can revoke when they feel like it. My feelings on the matter have been summed up by someone else more clever than me as: If buying isn't owning, then piracy isn't stealing.

The problem is that we've always been buying licences, it's just that the licence used to be attached to a physical object, so transferring the licence was as easy as transferring ownership of that physical object. It's never been legal to copy a book, film, or music album and sell the copies, for example, because the licence doesn't allow it. Hence freeware, shareware, and copyleft licences.

That is false. It is legal to copy materials that you own, provided you don't redistribute the copy, like for protection against loss. A notable exception of this is the USA DMCA. If, to make a copy, you have to break a copy protection scheme, then you are violating the DMCA.

The license isn't what takes away your permission to redistribute copies; copyright law does that by default. The license is only reminding you that it's not lifting that default, not granting you that permission.

Copying is neither here or there. There is an understanding that when you buy a book, you own the physical thing.

If I sell you a toaster and then remotely cause it to self-destruct, I owe you a new toaster.

Grandparent referenced "if buying isn't owning then copying isn't stealing". I would say that "if buying isn't owning, then stealing isn't stealing".

If a toaster is offered to sale to the public which the seller can remotely destroy at any time, and not pay anyone a cent, and the law upholds that, then it's morally fine to just walk out of their store with that toaster without paying.

Re: Sony deletes more movies from the accounts of people who ‘bought’ them

#162

Post by 1970-01-01 »

butterfi wrote: post #88

Its all a bit hand wavy nonsense. Own a physical copy? How long until its unplayable because either the media corrupts or the player isn't available? The only real "ownership" is the IP, everything else is just renting.

A laser-engraved QR code can store 3KB, enough for an entire ebook. The file format isn't the problem here.

Re: Sony deletes more movies from the accounts of people who ‘bought’ them

#164

Post by RiverCrochet »

vman81 wrote: post #24
goldenarm wrote: post #20

IANAL, but is it illegal to have a "Buy" button that is just a disguised "Rent" button? If not, should we change the law?

They'll argue you're "buying" a license that they can revoke when they feel like it. My feelings on the matter have been summed up by someone else more clever than me as: If buying isn't owning, then piracy isn't stealing.

Then the button should say "Buy Revocable License."

Inevitably people will ask what that means. That will lead to a FAQ on the company's site somewhere, and various videos on the social media explaining it periodically with lots of comments. That will be a good thing.

Corporate marketing teams will eventually settle on something better sounding but technically legal, something like "Premier Anytime Access" for specific movies (versus "Bronze 24-hr Access"), or similar.

Re: Sony deletes more movies from the accounts of people who ‘bought’ them

#165

Post by inigyou »

ssl-3 wrote: post #154
inigyou wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I suspect people who've gotten any depth into both desktop and mobile gaming don't think they're even remotely substitutes.

Gaming on a phone is definitely not for me. I've been using PCs for several decades; it's possible that mobile gaming will never be my jam. But I can accept that I'm not everyone. I suspect that we'll have whole generations of people who manage to grow up and grow old and without ever having, or even seeking, the opportunity to spend quality time gaming on PCs. I think that's alright. Things are allowed to change.

I'm pretty sure it's just exposure and time. Mobile is a great format for keeping yourself entertained on a subway. Desktop or console is a great format for actual games. People have more phones now because you need phones and you don't need desktops - that has nothing to do with the enjoyment you have gaming on each.

You used to be able to dial TIM on a landline phone to check the time (for free?). Then you (if you were a computer nerd) checked it on your computer, then on your cellphone. Because that's what was available. There was no connection between knowing the time and landline phones - people just had landline phones so it was a convenient way to deliver the service. That's how it is with mobile games now.

Remember Java and Flash applets? You could make anything you wanted as a native application, but RuneScape took off because you didn't have to install it.

Re: Sony deletes more movies from the accounts of people who ‘bought’ them

#166

Post by papyrus9244 »

ikekkdcjkfke wrote: post #80
qingcharles wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

California Assembly Bill 2426 (AB 2426), effective 1 January, 2025. Expands the state's false advertising laws to explicitly ban companies from using words like "buy," "purchase," "own," or "keep" if what the customer is actually getting is a revocable digital license governed by shady T&Cs.

Remember that the power is always with the people. We can enact any law we want

Laws are great and all. But what we really need is a massive boycott. Stop buying shit manufactured or sold by Sony for a year. That alone will probably force them to backtrack every single anti consumer decision they've made recently.

Re: Sony deletes more movies from the accounts of people who ‘bought’ them

#167

Post by naravara »

ssl-3 wrote: post #154
inigyou wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I suspect people who've gotten any depth into both desktop and mobile gaming don't think they're even remotely substitutes.

Gaming on a phone is definitely not for me. I've been using PCs for several decades; it's possible that mobile gaming will never be my jam. But I can accept that I'm not everyone. I suspect that we'll have whole generations of people who manage to grow up and grow old and without ever having, or even seeking, the opportunity to spend quality time gaming on PCs. I think that's alright. Things are allowed to change.

The Steam Deck is basically a way to play PC games on mobile. You can imagine a world where people can just plug their smartphone into a KVM and just use it as a gaming PC. Modern phones have enough computing power to play most games being produced today since a lot of them are indie or B titles that aren’t actually that intensive. And even the intensive AAA ones, if developers were willing to optimize for it and go for lower res graphics they could do those too. And they can definitely play any game that’s more than 10 years old.

Re: Sony deletes more movies from the accounts of people who ‘bought’ them

#168

Post by Laurel1234 »

teeray wrote: post #82
imglorp wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm hoping someday this will go the same way as other companies trying to redefine "unlimited", "free", or "lifetime". I hope lawyers reclaim "buy", "own", and "purchase" from shitbag marketers back into contract law, where they have English meanings. https://retailwire.com/t-mobile-att-verizon-fined-10-2m-for-... https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2024/07/lawsuit-t-mobile... At the very least, if Sony yanks your pu…

A $10m fine for mobile telcos is a rounding error. “Softer quarter due to outstanding legal and regulatory obligations…” The fines need to be a standard percentage of income or the personal assets / freedom of officers needs to be on the line if we want those punishments to change behavior.

> The fines need to be a standard percentage of income or the personal assets / freedom of officers needs to be on the line

This is the obvious solution to most problems but of course they're the ones writing the laws so it'd never happen in a trillion years.

Re: Sony deletes more movies from the accounts of people who ‘bought’ them

#169

Post by criddell »

naravara wrote: post #79
criddell wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sadly, the future might be phone gaming. The mobile gaming market is as big as the console and PC markets combined.

These are basically different markets that only compete with each other because there are finite hours in the day to engage with media, not because they’re offering variations on the same thing. It’s similar to comparing Netflix to the Criterion Streaming platform. Technically you’re doing the same thing, sitting on the couch watching a big screen, but the experience being pitched is a totally different one and the t…

I was thinking more about competition with suppliers than consumers.

If you are a games studio and have resources for three projects this year, do your investors want to see a phone, PC, or console game?

Re: Sony deletes more movies from the accounts of people who ‘bought’ them

#170

Post by dathinab »

15155 wrote: post #131
vman81 wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They'll argue you're "buying" a license that they can revoke when they feel like it. My feelings on the matter have been summed up by someone else more clever than me as: If buying isn't owning, then piracy isn't stealing.

"Stealing" in basically all common law jurisdictions requires intent to deprive the rightful owner of the property.

yes digital piracy was never stealing, but a mixture of contractual breach, copyright infringement and (illegally) causing financial damages through (illegally) causing lost sales.

Hence why you don't get tried for theft when you commit digital piracy. Which, as absurd as it might sound, sometimes (/in some cases) would be better to be tried for due to very unbalanced laws.

But also it should be pretty obvious that this isn't what people mean when they say "if buying isn't owning, then piracy isn't stealing" and a intentionally misinterpretation of statements based by nitpicking formulations is neither contributing anything meaningful nor is it appreciated (in most situations).

Post reply on HN